Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks

by com.novarithm.www
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

fx_ils_jpy

[PAID $0.002 USDC/call, x402, eip155:8453] Official ILS/JPY reference rate: latest European Central Bank fixing (or the official peg when JPY is pegged), with the rate date, the method (direct, cross via EUR or peg-derived) and the source attribution. Deterministic, sourced, no estimate.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "fx_ils_jpy"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses the paid cost and payment rail ($0.002 USDC/call, x402, eip155:8453), the upstream source (ECB), the deterministic/no-estimate guarantee, and the peg fallback path. The remaining gap is freshness cadence — it implies a daily fixing but never states how often the value updates or how stale it can be.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One dense, front-loaded block: cost/payment metadata first, then what the rate is, then the provenance guarantee. Every clause carries information, though the bracketed x402 payment prefix is bulky relative to the rest and slightly delays the core purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description must describe the payload, and it does name the returned fields (rate date, method, source attribution). It stops short of stating the quote convention (units of JPY per ILS) or numeric precision, which matters for a rate consumer assembling downstream calculations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond confirming the pair is fixed at call time, which the name already does. Baseline 4 applies for a parameterless tool.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific resource (ILS/JPY reference rate) and its authoritative source (latest ECB fixing, or official peg when JPY is pegged), plus what accompanies the rate: date, derivation method, attribution. This is far more specific than the sibling pair tools, whose names alone carry the pair but say nothing about sourcing.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'latest' fixing tells the agent this returns the current rate, not history, and the pair name fixes the currency scope. However, it never routes the agent among the obvious alternatives — fx_convert for conversions, fx_timeseries for historical series, fx_latest for multi-pair snapshots — so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Novarithm Agent Hub: trust and commerce checks toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources